MANILA, Philippines—In language and thought, the affidavit executed by “Nicole” virtually clearing Lance Cpl. Daniel Smith of rape read like it was done by someone else, her former lawyer said Wednesday.

Evalyn Ursua, whom Nicole fired in writing before flying to the United States, questioned the integrity of the document signed by her former client, saying the entire narration echoed the line of the defense during the 2006 trial.

“The question is, who assisted her? The language is definitely not Nicole’s language. It’s clearly prepared by a lawyer... It’s the story of the defense,” Ursua said.

“Those who are familiar with Nicole would know that she can’t possibly write like that... She does not have that level of articulation.”

According to Ursua, Nicole endured intense grilling in court during her testimony, and that “she survived the test.”

“Why was [the affidavit] kept secret? Was she advised of the implications? Was she forced? You know, it’s so easy to execute an affidavit. What’s hard is to test [a testimony] in court,” the lawyer said.

‘Ethical violation’

Ursua also wondered why Nicole signed the affidavit in the Makati office of Sycip Salazar Hernandez and Gatmaitan, the law firm representing Smith.

She said she had begun consultations with fellow lawyers on the legal action to be taken for the firm’s “obvious ethical violation.”

“[The firm] can’t act as lawyer for Nicole,” she said.

One suggestion raised was “to ask the Supreme Court to intervene” by investigating the firm.

“If indeed this affidavit has integrity, I question it because of the circumstances ... Everything about it is suspicious. It was irregularly executed,” Ursua said.

Smith’s lawyer, Jose Justiniano, begged off commenting on the matter. “I made a commitment [to] not give any statement to respect the privacy of the complainant,” he said.

‘They’re the enemy’

But Nicole’s mother stood by the affidavit, saying she was not deceiving anyone.

“It was my daughter who executed it. I can’t dictate to her,” she said when reached by phone in her native Zamboanga City.

She denied that Nicole had gotten help from Smith’s lawyers, saying: “Why should we ask them for help when they’re the enemy?”

The mother said certain “advisers,” including relatives who wanted to help the family move on, guided Nicole in composing the affidavit: “We got help from our advisers before we decided. It would have been futile to rush to war without knowing anything.”

She also said she understood where Ursua was coming from: “I cannot blame her because she lost someone she’s been fighting for. All we want is for them to respect our decision. We have fought long enough. We just want peace of mind, to live quietly.”

Constant plea

Nicole’s mother aired the same plea for a quiet life in an interview with the Philippine Daily Inquirer in Zamboanga City Wednesday afternoon.

“Please allow us to live a normal life. We are very tired and still traumatized, and we deserve to live a normal life,” she said.

She admitted that it was not easy to allow Nicole to leave the country: “It was a family decision, and no one influenced us.”

She said Nicole’s relationship with her boyfriend “offered hope and helped her out in overcoming the trauma that keeps haunting her.”

“She could not even sleep well. She always had these nightmares, and as a mother I was really bothered,” she said.

The mother said that after Smith’s rape conviction, she thought everything would be fine.

“But look at what has happened,” she said. “Almost everyone in the family is still affected. Every time we went out and people recognized us, my daughter almost melted with shame. We couldn’t have peace.”

She’s coming back

Nicole “promised to return,” the mother said, adding:

“All she wanted was to rest and be away from this. And I believe her falling in love again will help her overcome everything, as her boyfriend and his family have assured her of moral support.”

The mother said that contrary to speculation, no one had facilitated Nicole’s trip to the United States and that family members had contributed for the airfare.

She stressed that the family had accepted P100,000 not as settlement but as damages. “If we were after money, P100,000 would not suffice for what happened to my child,” she said.

The mother said she wrote President Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo after Smith’s conviction, seeking assistance for Nicole to travel to Italy to join Nicole’s brother.

“But nothing happened. Our request went unheeded. Whether legal or humanitarian support, we got nothing from the government,” she said.

Big dream

Nicole’s big dream was to go to the United States and work there as a nurse, according to her mother.

“It was her dream even before [the rape at the Subic Freeport Zone]. That’s why she took a special course in nursing—because she wanted to go abroad, to the United States.”

Nicole is a management accounting graduate.

Rep. Luz Ilagan of the party-list group Gabriela said Nicole’s recantation was due to the immense pressure on her.

“There can never be any justice for her while the RP-US Visiting Forces Agreement is in place,” Ilagan said.

“It shows how lopsided the agreement is, and that the US will do everything to protect its own, unlike the Philippines which leaves hapless young women to fend for themselves.”

But Nicole is “just a human being, and she needs to move on,” her mother said.

Fair game?

“Bigyan natin ng pagkatao ang anak ko (Give her her own humanity). Let’s not attach any issues like the VFA or the US presence to her case,” she said.

Ursua criticized the Inquirer for publishing Nicole’s picture and real name in its March 18 issue.

“Is she now fair game because of her recantation? Why is her picture on the front page?” the lawyer said.

“We were so careful to protect her.... Now, the Inquirer shows her entire face. What prevents other papers from doing the same because the Inquirer took the lead?”

It was the first time the Inquirer published Nicole’s picture since it started covering the Nov. 1, 2005, rape case.

“The Inquirer has a lot of explaining to do. There’s a rule that protects the identity of women who are victims of rape,” Ursua said.

She cited Section 44, of Republic Act No. 8353, which seals in confidentiality records related to criminal cases involving women and children.

The law also holds liable “whoever publishes or causes to be published” identifying details—name, address, telephone number, school—of victims or a family member “without the latter’s consent.”

The Inquirer had earlier consulted with its lawyer as well as with a former chief justice, who both said it was all right to use Nicole’s real name.

Justice Secretary Raul Gonzalez also said as much Wednesday, pointing out that Nicole “has come out” and “has signed her name already.”

But Makati Judge Benjamin Pozon, who had convicted Smith of rape, said on Tuesday it would be unlawful for the media to reveal Nicole’s name and run her picture. With a report from Norman Bordadora